Alright,

Here's one for you....

In years past, you could tell where a card man came from by the way he handled the pack. Chicago men were different from California men, California men were different from New York Men. New York men in the 40's were the California men of the 60's and 70's, and in the 70's, Dingle turned New York inside out.... and now New York card handling is about as far away from the California school as can be beleived?

Where do you live? Can you trace the influences of your card handling geographically, historically? Can you view yourself in these contexts?

Let's get serious here. That's what we came for...

Aaron

Hello Aaron,
Glad to have you here with us. At this point I cannot state a specific history of how my card handling developed. I almost wonder if in more recent years, because of the heightened use of videos and such, people are becoming less influenced through geographic/historical means and more from the specific styles of the "big names" in magic?

Hello,

I hail from the Pacific Northwest. Portland, Oregon to be exact. I must say that two of my major influences from this area would have to be Jim Pace (regarding coin work) and Justin Hanes(regarding card work.) I am not sure that I have a particular style, but I am very much a fan of David Williamson, John Carney and Gary Kurtz. They seem to handle the pack as if it were merely an extension of their arm, not some 52 part enigma they can not get rid of.

Thanks for your time.

Corey Burke

I think it's true. The genealogy of card magic does seem to be falling apart, due to the death or disappearance of nearly all the great masters of our craft. Gone are Vernon and Miller, Thompson and Marlo. Their best students are either professionals, with no care for dallying at magic meetings, or recluses, unwilling or unable to help us.

So here then, is the question. Is this just a cyclical lull, a time when the flower has turned to compost and has yet to give birth to new life? Or is it something else. Is the art as we know it changed for good? Are the masters, the real masters, gone forever? It's possible. Sleight of hand, as it was known in the old days, might be a dying art. Perhaps, for sleight of hand, this is truly a dark age.

I'm sure some folks will respond to these hateful statements. Don't make a liar of me...

Hmmmm….interesting question indeed! (about the geographical influences)

I think more and more, people start out with no real heritage. Someone from Boston or New Mexico can order the same videos, and have the same “influences.” It is only when a magician starts to advance past just what can be learned in a book, or on a video, that he starts to get these influences, in my humble opinion. I think way back when (although lord knows I wasn’t there to verify my hunch) people had that influence almost from day one, as a higher percentage of magic was taught through personal instruction.

Personally, I probably have a lot of the Chicago Magic influence pumping through my blood.

A large portion of that comes from location (Champaign, Illinois), but I think a bigger part is the company I hold. And that relates directly to your quote,” I think it's true. The genealogy of card magic does seem to be falling apart, due to the death or dissappearence of nearly all the great masters of out craft. Gone are Vernon and Miller, Thompson and Marlo. Their best students are either professionals, with no care for dallying at magic meetings, or recluses, unwilling or unable to help us.”

Here in Champaign we are lucky enough to have Don England, who is neither a professional with no care for dallying at magic meetings (well, unless it is a boring magic meeting ), nor unwilling or unable to help.

I think anyone who has talked to Bill Malone for more than a couple of minutes feels the same way about him.

And I could go on compiling a list of people.

But even past the students of the masters, I honestly believe there are new masters emerging. Not necessarily in the same way as those of yore, but masters nonetheless. These are the people still pushing the envelope. Although it may seem there is not as much envelope to push these days, people are doing it all around. And it is great.

So the “real” masters aren’t gone forever, in this writer's humble opinion. As long as people are coming up with new ideas, new approaches, and progressing the art, it will never be a “dying art.”

I think we are far from the dark ages of sleight of hand. There is so much knowledge available today about the art, so many tools. And even through all this, people are emerging with NEW tools. To me, that signifies something far from the dark ages.

Garrett,

I like your style. But I should note, it seems you've been hanging around Don England, and that might have something to do with it. Don is one of those few masters around, and so is Bill Malone. These two men are perhaps the greatest legacy to their teacher, Ed Marlo. When I saw Don handle cards, it brought a tear to my eye. His touch is graceful and his manner quiet. He is a true master of his craft. It's fortunate for you to spend time with him. It's also fortunate for you to recognize him. There are many in these times who would look at his work, and recognize nothing remarkable. Of course, this is because Don is a master, and has concealed his craft so entirely. Happy are those who live within driving distance of a real master. Good for you. Clearly you've progressed to the point in your studies where you CAN recognize your own lineage. What a wonderful goal.

Great question.

Parallel questions exist in many other fields right now, especially those that had relied on oral traditions and individual mentoring in the past. I make my living as a pianist, and I can't count the number of times since college that I've heard similar concerns voiced among jazz musicians -- the old masters are dying, all the young guys sound alike, there's no longer a West Coast sound distinguishable from a New York sound, etc.

As far as technology erasing geographic style differences, it probably is to an extent. But there are different ways of looking at that. Is it the unfortunate loss of "something special" that developed within individual communities? Or is the "something" itself, when you get right down to it, really nothing more than ignorance of what was going on elsewhere, caused by the limits of communication that existed at the time; something that came to be seen as "special" only because it was all people knew, so they might as well make the most of it? If the technology had existed 40 years ago for aspiring magicians in far-flung corners of the country (and world) spend a few dollars and pop in a teaching video of Marlo or Vernon, would they have? Of course. And while it wouldn't have diminished those men's contributions a bit, it probably would have resulted in large numbers of what would have been termed Marlo and Vernon clones, much the same way that people today talk about Ammar, Daryl, or Blaine clones.

I think the downside of creating larger numbers of hacks (who will likely lose interest soon enough anyway) is outweighed by the upside of making the information available to serious students who don't have the luck of geographic proximity.

Quinn

Quinn,

That's a good post. Worthy of serious thought. Maybe I just like that old timey style......but what can I say? I have been all around the world, and they just don't make 'em like they used to. Anywhere.

I think every generation goes through the same experience --"Kids today have no respect, why when I was your age..." I say that, my dad says that, and his dad said that, etc.

Every age has its hacks. In Vernon's and Marlo's day, in Leipzig's and Malini's day, in Hofsinzer's day, and on back, there were hacks. There have always been those schlepp magicians who are so horrible, that they make one wish humans didn't have opposable thumbs. Of course, the great ones are recorded, while the dorks mercifully fade into obscurity.

I agree with a previous poster, Quinn. Although the Internet speeds up the spread of dabblers and kids worshipping David Blaine as "ten times better than Vernon," it also allows people in isolated areas to progress in the art. I think there was a Chicago school for so long because only those who lived in the Chicago area (or other major metropolitan areas) had access to the masters.

I think the ratio of masters to serious magicians to hacks is the same now as it always has been.

Something to think about is that the masters weren't always great. Houdini labored in vaudeville obscurity for years. One of his early shows that featured a cuff escape ended with Houdini still struggling to escape from a pair of cuffs as the audience left. (He had been slipped a set of cuffs with shot in them, so that once closed, could not be re-opened.) A magician might have written up that act by saying, "Man, what's happened to magic? This Houdini guy, who fancies himself as a Robert Houdin, couldn't get out of a set of handcuffs, and was still thrashing around as the audience walked out on him."

I think times have changed. The communal death of card magic has hit the fraternity hard but I don’t think this is the end of ‘schools of magic.’ I think that the commercialization of magic has changed how people handle cards—or at least how younger magicians do. I can easily identify followers of magicians. For example, I can spot a student of the “Easy to Master Card” Series from a mile away—I can also see their break from that distance. I can easily see magicians who worships Kenner from how many times a minute they do Sybil. Students of Dingle, as well as Jennings, can be spotted by choice of material and DL of choice. There are no Marlo students anymore due to the fact that he had no illustrations (just a joke...I hope). See, these days, it’s now how you handle cards as much as what and how you perform with them; what effects you select and how many sequences they have. For example, there was once I time when I could easily be spotted as a Chicago-Bar guy through my selection of effects, improvisation style, and dependence on the five essential tools of the professional. These days, there are no students of masters…only members of their cults. I guess I plead guilty to Vernon's; my friend Noah, to Dingle's and Jennings's.

I think I dribble the cards too loudly—I hope they won’t hate me on the West Coast.

A Tiny Waltz-

J

Jake,

You sound like you have your feet firmly planted on the ground. There are only five of us left in the LA area who will shoot you for dribbling the cards. I'm one of them. Cut it out, and the world can be yours....

ps. Good joke about the illustrations.

Right now we are in the shadow or wake of the masters. Look back...Malini, Rossini, Leipzig. Then we jet to Marlo and Vernon. There are decades in between their status of mastery. We are just now approaching the same decades from the passing of these guys.

Great masters whose only fault was to study under these established masters (thinking Jennings, Klause, Malone, and many others here) are sadly labeled "followers of" instead of masters themselves, at least as history seems to be recording them.

Certainly the influence of a master is so strong that it takes time just to get to the point where "improving" upon them can be accepted.

Marlo and Vernon also have the advantage having existed at the time of a change in the way magic was chronicled. First indepth photos were added in books and then video, even as rudimentary as it was then, was used to capture these guys. Certainly considering that, their influence will run longer than those of their predicessors.

Mark my words, there is a resurgence in old school touch with cards. There are names not mentioned of underground guys who have influenced a West Coast movement. Guys like Jack McMillen have influenced guys like Chosse, who in turn influenced Rhodell.

I think it is the guys who study the underground names from the period of the masters who arise to become the masters themselves. Perhaps it is their "off the beaten track" spirit. Perhaps they are just the ones to diefy the masters less and question more. Or maybe they are just working from a different starting point.

So don't rule out too soon people like Chosse, Goodwin, Rhodell. There is more to being labeled a master than technique and skill. Timing plays a fateful hand as well.

Some wee morning ramblings.....

Interesting question on styles of card handling. Coming from Baltimore, I'm not sure where My style, if any, falls. I learned the color change and side slip from Arthur Cowen, a retired follower of Leipzig. Cowen also has some influence over rank Thompson. All else was learned from books. So there was some Vernon, Marlo, Simon etc. in the development. I favored Vernon. I'm sure that Cowen's influence has had the bigest influence as I tend to use the side steal and color change. Almost all else is from books.

Of course there has been some influence from New York. Don Costello first showed me that you could do a pass and not be seen. Howie Schwarzman came down, but had little influence on my style.

Since I haven't traveled as widely as most I can't really comment, so I really should keep my mouth shut.

The question on the dearth of the masters need some thought.

I think that the master innovators have become world wild. Think of Ascanio and Tamariz from Spain. Few can approach Ascanio or Tamariz for magic theory.

We have great people from France and the British Isles. Think Walton, Elmsley, Duffie etal.

I think the success of Paper Engine shows that there is a thirst for the difficult. This had to be the toughest card book I've seen since Erdnase.

Also I should mention Giobbi whose 4 volume work is masterful for its teaching if not its creativity.

I think the regional styles are there. It's just that everyone doesn't show the influence. I think that if you look at the really serious magicians in an area, the ones that really study and search out the masters, you will see the influences in their performances. I know in this area (I live about an hour from Buffalo, NY) you can see the style of Eddie Fechter in most of the serious students of card magic even though Eddie is gone and many in the area never met him. The students of today now learn from the students of Eddie, such as Lou Gallo and Karl Norman, and the Buffalo bar (and card) magic style lives on.

Of course the ones the magic community remember most are the teachers. I think there is definitely a new wave of card masters who are devoting a lot of effort to teaching.. Malone, McBride, Green spring to mind.

WHAT is the "communal death of Card Magic"?
I have read this several times and don't understand what the phrase refers to.
Best, PSC

There may indeed be some slight variations between regional styles, but nothing like it was back in the days before video and cheap mass transportation.

One thing I have noticed lately (and this may be a sign of something) is that when I am asked to teach magic to people in their early twenties or younger, they sometimes do not know how to shuffle cards at all. When I ask if they ever played card games as a kid, they say, "No, just video games." Even solitaire is now commonly played on a computer. While sometimes this is a blessing in disguise, it does make me wonder if playing cards will some day be as suspiciously odd a magical prop as the change bag is today.

Jim Morton

Hi Aaron.

Talking about true masters of sleight of hand.
What do you think of Earl Nelson with a deck of cards?? Or Mike Skinner when he was alive and in his prime?

Looking forward to read your book,
best,
Daniel

Aaron,

I wasn't sure from your original post, but do you think that "New York" style of today is different from the "California" style of today? Could you explain what the difference is?

Pete